Realistic Goals Needed for Iran Nuclear Negotiations

On the radar: It’s not all breakout and irreversibility; the Latest from Vienna; How to unwind sanctions; Iraq on sidelines in Vienna; New START politics in House; New Bomber gets RFP; Alabama loves it some missile defense; Scotland’s proposed constitution; and the Case for getting rid of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons.

June 17, 2014 | Edited by Geoffrey Wilson

Get real - “Despite some stumbles, the Iran nuclear talks resuming in Vienna this week may yet yield an accord that could end the prolonged crisis,” writes Ali Vaez in a piece for The National Interest. “But the promise of success could turn into colossal failure, particularly if both sides cling to equally dubious preoccupations over ‘breakout time’ and ‘irreversible sanctions relief.’”

--Vaez writes that breakout calculations are more “theoretical guesstimates” that influence political judgements than a realistic metric for a negotiating position. Similarly, Iran’s seeking of permanent sanctions removal is unhelpful, as Congress can always reimpose sanctions.

--“What is needed, rather, is a compromise that satisfies both sides’ irreducible, bottom-line requirements: for Iran, a meaningful enrichment program, continued scientific advancement and tangible sanctions relief; for the P5+1, a firewall between Iran’s civilian and potential military nuclear capabilities, airtight monitoring mechanisms, and sufficient time and Iranian cooperation to establish the exclusively peaceful nature of the country’s nuclear program. Such a solution would enable both parties to sell the deal at home and would serve as a springboard to a different kind of relationship.” Read the full piece here. http://bit.ly/UHYpRu

Update from Vienna - “Iran and six world powers began a ‘critical’ week of nuclear negotiations in Vienna still far apart despite daily contacts over the past month, a senior administration official said Monday. With a negotiating deadline of July 20 now nearly a month away, the group held a round of nation-to-nation meetings with the Iranians last week, including an unusual session between high-level U.S. and Iranian officials. Though the two sides have some better ideas about how they could theoretically bridge the gaps, there remain ‘significant differences’ between them, the official told reporters in a briefing.”

--“Although negotiators for several countries have said more time may be needed, this official said the group is not currently talking about seeking an extension. They believe a quick completion of the talks would be preferable and are pushing toward it, the official said… The United States and Iran, the key players in the group, each badly want a deal. But if they were to come home with terms that were perceived as too lenient, they would come under fire from skeptical opponents of a deal.” Read the full report from Paul Richter for the Los Angeles Times here. http://lat.ms/1lNX19Q

Sticking points - Peter Kenyon of NPR sums up some of the major sticking points at this stage of the talks. http://n.pr/1pcgrGi

Easing sanctions - How might the U.S. and EU ease sanctions as part of an agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program? Expert Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service and Cornelius Adebahr of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace author two new reports for the Atlantic COuncil’s Iran Task Force.

--“Easing US Sanctions on Iran” by Kenneth Katzman. (pdf) http://bit.ly/1vAUmDi

--"Easing EU Sanctions on Iran” by Cornelius Adebahr. (pdf) http://bit.ly/1uATagJ

On the sidelines - “U.S. and Iranian officials discussed the crisis in Iraq on the sidelines of separate negotiations about the Iranian nuclear program in Vienna,” report Arshad Mohammed and Parisa Hafezi for Reuters. “Militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have routed Baghdad's army and seized the north of the country in the past week, threatening to dismember Iraq and unleash all-out sectarian warfare with no regard for national borders… ‘The disastrous situation in Iraq was discussed today . No specific outcome was achieved,’ a senior Iranian official told Reuters of the talks on Iraq. ‘Iran is a great country that can play a key role in restoring stability in Iraq and the region.’" Read the full report here. http://reut.rs/1iDVvCv

Tweet - @BahmanKalbasi: Full statement by British Foreign Secretary @WilliamJHague on reopening of UK embassy in #Tehran, #Iran: http://bit.ly/1i81810

U.S.-Iran cooperation - “Shock at the onslaught by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) — gobbling up Sunni areas of Iraq and slaughtering Iraqi Shiites — has pushed the United States and Iran to consider a tacit alliance reminiscent of their efforts more than a decade ago in ousting the Taliban in Afghanistan,” writes Barbara Slavin for Al Jazeera. “The crisis has once again put Washington and Tehran on the same side, opposing Sunni sectarian extremists who hate both Americans and Shia Muslims.”

--“The situation now is more conducive to cooperation, when U.S. and Iranian officials communicate with each other directly, routinely and at a high level. After months of insisting that the only topic for these consultations was Iran’s nuclear program, a senior U.S. official disclosed Monday that Iraq would be discussed ‘on the margins’ of previously scheduled talks in Vienna between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5+1).”

--“The Iraq talks are likely to be led by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns, who unexpectedly turned up in Vienna, and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif… The most positive potential result of the Iraq crisis is that it will further incentivize the U.S. and Iran to reach a long-term nuclear agreement. Iran, its resources already depleted by sanctions and the Syrian civil war, urgently needs a nuclear deal. And with so much of the Middle East already in flames, the last thing anyone needs is a confrontation over Iran’s nuclear program.” Read the full report here. http://alj.am/1qnkjGm

Keep New START safe - “In order to protect America’s national security, we must keep nuclear weapons away from those who may want to harm us,” writes Rep. Loretta Sanchez in a piece for Defense News. “Unfortunately...Two weeks ago, House Republicans voted for an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would cut funding to implement the treaty for fiscal 2015.”

--“The Republicans believe freezing funding for New START is an effective reaction to Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine… [But] Risking our national security is not a fitting solution… These efforts are not about making best friends. They are about working together, when possible, on items of mutual interest in order to advance America’s interests… As one State Department official stated, ‘we shouldn’t shoot ourselves in the foot’ by thwarting the progress we have made toward reducing Russia’s nuclear weapons arsenal.” Read the full piece here. http://bit.ly/1lOhvPI

Tweet - @AaronMehta: RT @KedarPavgi: Kim Jong Un in a sub is making my day right now (via @USNINews) // ahoy http://bit.ly/SQxnpa

LRSB RFP- “The request for proposal (RFP) on the US Air Force’s long range strike-bomber program will be issued soon, perhaps in a matter of days, according to the service’s top civil acquisitions official. ‘That program is in a competitive phase,’ William LaPlante, assistant Air Force secretary for acquisition, said during a speech at the Atlantic Council in Washington on Friday. ‘We’re probably days away from releasing the final RFP for that program.’”

--“Only some basic information has been made public: The service has a mid-2020s operational date in mind; the plane will be based on existing technologies; there will be room for a large payload; and the service is at least exploring making the bomber optionally-manned… The big question on the bomber has always been cost.” Read the full report by Aaron Mehta for Defense News here. http://bit.ly/1qozAGW

Politics and GMD - “Alabama senators, whose state stood to profit from military contracts, in recent years pushed to expand an antimissile system despite officials' objections,” Global Security Newswire reports. “The Ground-based Midcourse Defense system -- comprised of 30 strategic interceptors deployed in Alaska and California -- is the country's principal defense against a limited long-range ballistic missile attack. Boeing is the primary contractor for the system; Raytheon is the developer of its radars and the troubled kinetic kill vehicle atop each interceptor. Thousands of jobs in Alabama depend either directly or indirectly on the GMD system.”

--A Los Angeles Times investigation found that “the then-director of the Pentagons' Missile Defense Agency, Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly, sought in 2008-2009 to reallocate program funding from preparing a third interceptor field in Alaska to fixing technology problems with the kill vehicle.” However he “was ultimately overruled by then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates following private lobbying by a group of senators, including Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who did not want to see work on the third field postponed.” Sen. Sessions “has repeatedly resisted efforts to decelerate the pace of expanding the system, according to the Times. His fellow Alabama senator, Richard Shelby (R), who is the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, has similarly attempted to sidestep questions about the program's rising price tag and whether the system's expansion should be halted until technology problems are worked out.” Read the full report here. http://bit.ly/1pcVdrL

No nukes in Scotland - “A potential independent Scotland should include the goal of removing all nuclear arms from Scottish soil in its constitution, a senior Scottish official says. The locally governing Scottish National Party has pledged to evict all British nuclear warheads, Trident ballistic missiles and strategic submarines from Scotland by 2020 if local voters choose independence in a September referendum.” Read the full story here. http://bit.ly/1pF6YZS

Tweet - @StephenUCS: House appropriators significantly increase funding for dismantlement of #nuclear weapons, from $30M to $54M. So bizarre Obama admin cut this

Bombs away - “In 1991, U.S. President George H. W. Bush decided to retire almost all the tactical nuclear weapons operated by the U.S. Army and the U.S. Navy,” write Barry Blechman and Russell Rumbaugh in a piece for Foreign Affairs. “His reasons were simple: these short-range weapons were militarily useless and imposed significant burdens on the armed forces in terms of money, manpower, and time. Twenty-three years later, only one type of tactical nuclear weapon remains in the U.S. inventory: the B-61 gravity bomb.”

--“Maintaining the status quo is not an option. If Washington wants to retain its tactical nuclear weapons systems in Europe, the Pentagon will soon have to make a major long-term investment in their modernization. Squandering resources on outmoded weapons systems would be a poor way to confront Russia. Instead, Washington should step up other activities that can demonstrate U.S. resolve and abilities. Multilateral exercises in central Europe and temporary deployments of U.S. air and naval forces to allies in the Baltics and the Mediterranean are just two of the many ways that Washington could make clear that letting go of its tactical nuclear weapons in Europe is not a sign of retreat.”

--“In any case, the United States’ nuclear doctrine makes clear that its strategic nuclear capabilities are intended to deter and, if necessary, respond to a nuclear attack on either the U.S. homeland itself or U.S. allies. It makes no difference whether the United States retaliates with tactical nuclear weapons or strategic ones. For decades, Washington has provided its allies in Europe with a credible nuclear deterrent, and it should continue to do so. But maintaining its tactical nuclear weapons in Europe is a particularly ineffective and wasteful way of keeping the continent safe.” http://fam.ag/1i5Y9G6

Quick-hit:

--“Missiles and Morale” by Eryn MacDonald for All Things Nuclear. http://bit.ly/1i62JnJ

Events:

--“The Iran Nuclear Deal and the Impacts on its Neighbors.” Discussion with Abdullah Baadood, Salah Elzein, Bijan Khajehpour, Afshin Molavi, David Ottaway, and Marina Ottaway. June 23 from 9:30-12:00 at the Wilson Center, 5th floor, Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1lsjx99

--“PONI Breakfast with Kirk Donald.” Breakfast discussion with former National Nuclear Security Administration Deputy Administrator Kirk Donald. June 26 from 9:00-10:30 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1owrOLA

--“Toward a Comprehensive, Effective Nuclear Deal with Iran?” Discussion with Daryl Kimball, Greg Thielmann, Kelsey Davenport, and Frank von Hippel. June 26 from 10:00-12:00 at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Choate Room, 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW. RSVP here. http://bit.ly/1p9kz8a

--“Aegis Sea-Based Missile Defense: Present Status and Future Recommendations.” Discussion with John James, Rear Adm. James Kilby, Ron O’Rourke, Henry Cooper, and Robert Soofer. June 26 from 12:00-2:00 at SVC 201-00, Capitol Visitor Center. RSVP by email to Polly Parke at pparke@ifpa.org